Category Archives: Politics

“The EPA finally banned indoor use of the pesticide in 2001.”

Medium: My Quest to Understand What Caused My Children’s Birth Defects. “A journey into my family history, the chemical industry, and genetics”. By Amy Roost.

“It matters because the government is no longer working for the people or public health when a $1 million donation by Dow Chemical to the Trump Inauguration happens to coincide with former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt rejecting the advice of his agency’s chemical safety experts and reversing the Obama era’s prohibition against agricultural uses of chlorpyrifos. Fortunately, environmentalists and public health advocates were quick to file suit. A federal appeals court has issued a stay effectively banning the agricultural use of the chlorpyrifos until the case is settled. The EPA has appealed the court’s decision and the $800 billion chemical industry lobby will undoubtedly hire the best lawyers money can buy.

It matters because Dow continues to sell chlorpyrifos without proper warning labels in developing nations.”

Link via MetaFilter.

Guide to Brexit

BBC News: Brexit: What happens now? “The UK and EU have agreed a variable extension to Article 50 to delay Brexit. It was originally scheduled to happen on 29 March. […] Having lost two votes on the Brexit deal, Theresa May is now asking MPs to back just half of it – the withdrawal agreement, which covers the divorce settlement.

If she is successful, Brexit would be delayed to 22 May but there will still be issues to sort out. If she fails, we can expect the process of “indicative votes” to continue on Monday.”

Link via MetaFilter.+

“Regierung sieht sich nicht gebunden”

Deutsche Welle: Unterhaus erzwingt Abstimmungen über Brexit-Alternativen. “Premierministerin May hat noch immer keine Mehrheit für ihren Brexit-Deal im Parlament in Aussicht. Nun wollen die Abgeordneten auf eigene Faust eine Alternative suchen und sichern sich größeren Einfluss auf den Brexit.”

“Das Unterhaus in London bietet der Regierung Paroli. Es nahm den Antrag einer Gruppe Parlamentarier am Abend in der Schlussabstimmung mit 329 zu 302 Stimmen an. Die Vorlage gibt dem Parlament die Möglichkeit, eine Reihe von Abstimmungen über Alternativen zum Brexit-Kurs von Regierungschefin Theresa May abzuhalten.

Das Abstimmungsergebnis bedeutet eine bittere Schlappe für die Premierministerin. Sie hatte sich wiederholt dagegen ausgesprochen, dass das Unterhaus entsprechende Befugnisse bekommt. Mehrere Staatssekretäre legten ihre Ämter nieder, um gegen die Regierung votieren zu können. Der Brexit-Experte der oppositionellen Labour-Partei, Keir Starmer, bezeichnete das Ergebnis via Twitter als “weitere demütigende Niederlage für die Premierministerin, die komplett die Kontrolle über ihre Partei, ihr Kabinett und den Brexit-Prozess verloren hat”.”

“A common refrain among the Brexiles I speak to is that they no longer recognise the country they grew up in.”

The Guardian: ‘The Brexodus is under way’: meet the Brits leaving the UK. “In the year after the Brexit vote, 17,000 British people sought citizenship of another EU country – and many have since upped and left. Five ‘Brexiles’ explain why they’re starting a new life overseas.”

Link via MetaFilter.

“It is so obvious with this president that had voters known some of what seem to be his business interests, he may not have been elected president“

The Washington Post: Trump could be left off some states’ ballots in 2020 if these bills become law.

“In refusing to release his tax returns, President Trump bucked decades of tradition and set off a Democrat hunt to obtain them. Now several statehouses are looking at making their release a condition of the 2020 presidential election: Show us your tax returns, or you can’t be on the ballot.

Eighteen states have considered legislation this year that would require presidential and vice presidential candidates to post their tax returns to appear on the ballot during a primary or general election, according to data from the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

Proponents of the bills, such as the one passed by the Washington state Senate this week, say they are aimed at increasing transparency and returning to the “norm“ of candidates releasing their financial records. But Democratic lawmakers behind the some of the legislation have admitted they are also very much about Trump, which raises legal and political questions about how far states can — or should — go in regulating who appears on their ballot, especially in a hyperpartisan climate.”

Link via MetaFilter.